European Journal of Turkish Studies Social Sciences on Contemporary Turkey 21 | 2015 Beyond Soft Power The stakes and configurations of the influence of contemporary Turkey in the world Gabrielle Angey and Jérémie Molho (dir.) Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/ejts/5219 DOI: 10.4000/ejts.5219 ISSN: 1773-0546 Publisher EJTS Electronic reference Gabrielle Angey and Jérémie Molho (dir.), European Journal of Turkish Studies, 21 | 2015, « Beyond Soft Power » [Online], Online since 31 December 2015, connection on 12 April 2020. URL : http:// journals.openedition.org/ejts/5219 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/ejts.5219 This text was automatically generated on 12 April 2020. © Some rights reserved / Creative Commons license 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS A critical approach to soft power: Grasping contemporary Turkey’s influence in the world Gabrielle Angey-Sentuc and Jérémie Molho The rise and fall of Turkey’s soft power discourse Discourse in foreign policy under Davutoğlu and Erdoğan Yohanan Benhaïm and Kerem Öktem Turkish sports diplomacy in the service of renewed power? The uses and limits of Turkey’s “sport power” Jean-François Polo The Soft Power of Framing: Constructing Istanbul as a Regional Art Centre Jérémie Molho An illusionary power of seduction? An assessment of Turkey’s cultural power in the Arab world in light of its audio-visual presence in the region Jana Jabbour Recompositions de l’État et coproduction de l’action publique Les écoles du mouvement Gülen dans la politique étrangère turque au Kurdistan irakien Yohanan Benhaïm Soft power and the challenges of private actors: Turkey - Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) relations and the rising role of businessmen in Turkish Foreign Policy Merve Özdemirkıran Challenging the Soft Power Analysis A Case Study of African Students in the Gülen movement’s Turkey Gabrielle Angey-Sentuc European Journal of Turkish Studies, 21 | 2015 2 A critical approach to soft power: Grasping contemporary Turkey’s influence in the world Gabrielle Angey-Sentuc and Jérémie Molho We would like to thank the French Institute of Anatolian Studies for providing the financial and material support for this project in addition to the ANR “Trans-acting Matters: Areas and Eras of a (Post-)Ottoman Globalization”. We would also like to extend our thanks to all the project participants who contributed to the reflections presented in this introduction. We also thank the editorial board of the European Journal of Turkish Studies, and especially Marc Aymes. I. Thinking Turkish influence in the midst of a dramatic political shift 1 On 5 April 2015, Joseph Nye, the scholar who first coined the term “soft power”, was quoted in an article published in Today’s Zaman asserting that Turkish soft power had declined over the past few years. According to Nye, as a result Turkey would subsequently have “less soft power, less democracy”.1 During the 2000s, the concept of soft power became a popular term applied to the perceived rise in Turkey’s global and regional influence. The article in Today’s Zaman not only reminds us of the dramatic internal and external shifts that have affected Turkey since 2013, but also raises questions concerning the capacity of the concept to characterise Turkey’s influence beyond its borders. 2 This special issue of Beyond Soft Power: Stakes and configurations of the influence of contemporary Turkey’ is the result of a research project initiated in early 2013 at the French Institute of Anatolian Studies in order to question the concept of soft power and develop new perspectives and empirically based research critically examining Turkey’s presence abroad.2 At the time of the project’s initiation, the regional and domestic configurations of Turkey differed absolutely from the current crisis context. Turkey’s influence in the Balkans, the Middle East, Central Asia and even in Africa, had been European Journal of Turkish Studies, 21 | 2015 3 progressively expanding for several decades, a trend also perceptible in Ankara’s increasing involvement in international organisations. The Arab Spring led to a conducive environment for the idealisation of the so-called “Turkish model” of governance. Meanwhile, Davutoğlu’s “zero problem with the neighbours” policy (Davutoğlu 2001) had become well known and was represented as a success. Turkey’s substantial development and growth stood in marked contrast to the economic crisis in EU countries. Turkey’s presence in the media and the broadcasting of Turkish TV shows abroad, particularly in neighbouring countries with shared cultural affinities, was perceived as evidence of the country’s rising cultural attractiveness . The Turkish government itself emphasised the growth of its cultural and diplomatic influence through a self-promoting soft power and Turkish model discourse. However, regional and domestic shifts occurring in the past few years have raised serious questions concerning the legitimacy and authority of this discursive framework. Ankara’s ability to affect neighbouring actors has been limited by a number of internal and external political episodes that have shed light on Turkey’s regional and international presence. Turkey’s military involvement in the Syrian and Iraq war from summer 2015, the declining security situation on its domestic territory, including the bomb attacks in Suruç (20 July 2015), Ankara (10 October 2015; 13 March 2016), and Istanbul (12 January 2016), the reactivation of the war against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in South- East Turkey following the end of the peace process, the rising authoritarian tendencies of Erdoğan’s regime, and the judicial war against the Gülen movement, have cast serious doubts on Turkey’s position.3 Consequently analysts have stopped glorifying Turkey as a source of inspiration for the region. 3 The shifting political context confirmed our initial intuitions, underlining the inadequacy of the concept of soft power for apprehending the complex dynamics and stakes of Turkey’s commitment beyond its borders. Consequently, through grounded researches on contemporary Turkey’s influence, this special issue makes a necessary contribution by theoretically questioning and redefining the value of the concept of soft power. Our aim is to go “beyond” the use of soft power as an analytical tool by addressing its limitations and suggesting alternative approaches to analysing the transnational and international dynamics of a country. The soft power concept: a category of analysis or a category of practice? 4 In order to clarify the issues in the debate on soft power, we shall review the genealogy of this concept by introducing Nye’s initial theory and considering its subsequent evolution and spread around the world. From an American-centered perspective to the analysis of the rise of emerging powers, and from a state-centered theory to the emphasis on the role of non-state actors, the various uses of the notion of soft power have demonstrated its malleability. Furthermore, in addition to its function as an analytical device, the concept is often coined as a rhetorical argument in support of foreign policy consultancy. European Journal of Turkish Studies, 21 | 2015 4 A genealogy of the soft power concept 5 At first glance, soft power seems to be a relatively simple concept to comprehend, its reach often extending far beyond the academic field. Usually defined in opposition to hard power (physical and economic coercion), its origins are easy to trace to the Princeton and Harvard-educated political scientist Joseph Nye, the American scholar responsible for coining the term. Since its introduction, Nye has continuously updated and promoted the concept and theory. He has been a Harvard faculty member since 1964, and served as the Dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government from 1995 to 2004. He held several positions in Washington, including Deputy to the Undersecretary of State for Security Assistance and Science and Technology in the Carter Administration from 1977 to 1979, and Assistant Secretary of Defence for International Security in the Clinton Administration between 1994 and 1995. He is also the head of the Northern American Chair of the Trilateral Commission, a private organisation gathering together influential intellectuals on contemporary politics. Soft power evolved over time as Nye theoretically developed the concept, and as it was adopted to meet the needs of various interests or places. 6 A genealogy of Nye’s theory shows that it evolved in correlation with the global geopolitical context and in reaction to its critiques. In 1990, Joseph Nye introduced the concept of soft power in the book Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power (Nye 1990a), and in an article published in the same year in the journal Foreign Policy (Nye 1990b). At that time, the main goal of soft power analysis was to show that America was not a declining power4 and, in Nye’s view, would retain its position as the world’s leading superpower. Instead of retrenching behind its frontiers, he argued that the USA had to maintain an ambitious foreign policy program through the use of “soft power”. These initial works defined soft power as part of a generalised strategy of the state in an increasingly interdependent world: Soft cooptive power is just as important as hard command power. If a State can make its power seem legitimate in the eyes of others, it will encounter less resistance to its wishes. If its culture and ideology are attractive, others will more willingly follow. If it can establish international norms consistent with its society, it is less likely to have to change. If it can support institutions that make other states wish to channel or limit their activities in ways the dominant state prefers, it may be spared the costly exercise of coercive or hard power. (Nye 1990a: 167) 7 Nye insists on the importance of soft power for states in the post-Cold War interconnected world: gaining legitimacy for international actions, enhancing a state’s capacity to form international coalitions, avoiding being subject to the influence of others, and preventing military confrontations.